Skip to main content

About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
on your seat belts. let's take a look at how this story is unfolding as i speak. several months ago fbi agents started investigating harassment allegations against paula broad broadwell, general petraeus' biography and as it turns out, his mistress. they sent messages to this woman, jill kelly who worked as a social liaison at an air force base, and she also knows petraeus. the messages were not threatening but full of cat fight stuff like you parade around the base. you need to take it down a notch. those were the e-mail messages sent from paula broadwell to jill kelly. and jill kelly took those e-mails to the fbi and said i don't know who this person is and i don't want to keep getting them. the fbi learned that the e-mails were coming from broadwell, and they interviewed paula broadwell and general petraeus, and they admitted that they were having an affair with each other. they said that the affair went on after he left the military. if it went on during military duty he could be prosecuted in military courts. they also looked at whether broadwell leaked confidential information. sh
who volunteers as a social planner for the military went to a friend at the fbi and complained she was getting harassing e-mails from paula broadwell. he had been sending shirtless photos to kelly and that's how they found out. it's so convoluted. we're back after the break. >>(narrator) bill press is on current tv. >>liberal and proud of it. >>(narrator) unafraid, outspoken, and above all politically direct. >>we'll do our best to carry the flag from 6 to 9 every morning. [ ♪ theme music ♪ ] [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> announcer: ladies and gentlemen, it's "the stephanie miller show"." [ ♪ music ♪ ] >> stephanie: i'm still trying to untangle my brain from jacki's newscast. >> shirtless--all i heard was shirtless. >> get jacki on the phone. >> travis! >> the other command center afghanistan is being investigate for sending inappropriate e-mails to the woman. >> 20 to 30,000. >> and general petraeus sent inappropriate e-mails to--what the heck is going on over there. >> 20 to 30,000 inappropriate e-mails. it's hard to send 20 to 30,000 inconstant30,000instant messages. >> i keep
petraeus or is that totally irrelevant? we don't know yet. >> john: that's how the fbi got gotti. do you think that if that were the case, if that attack was motivated because there was a secret c.i.a. black sight prison somewhere in the consulate this is what the c.i.a.'s director's girlfriend was saying in a speech. when fox news and information clearing house are agreeing on something, i'm disturbed in general. or inspired. but if that's the case, is that a scandal so huge that the media won't even touch it? >> i think the media will touch it. the media is digging on it. i know certainly our michael hastings is look at it. i'm sure national security report from every news outlet is digging because that would be the finish in some ways, the story of the century. you're tapping into the major pop culture moment and the return to -- and sort of a massive national security breakthrough. i mean everybody wants that story if they can get it. the question is could they get it. we're talking about that that's going
was that he wants more of the investigation -- the information to come out. the fbi agents who had interviewed survivors of the attack. and he wants to know more information before he says he would be willing to elevate somebody who was involved in any part of this controversy. i do think that susan rice is not really the one that i am personally most concerned about. just as a. >> reporter: trying to find out the truth. the state department itself and susan rice is part of it but not really involved in deciding why they didn't get adequate security who did what in terms of trying to help the people who were pinned down. that seems to be more of a c.i.a. question. those are the people i really want to find out more about. >> eliot: i think that's exactly right. there are a myriad of legitimate questions that should be asked about the information through the decision making but it seems to me susan rice is the least informed, least interesting party here and that's why trying to take her hostage in effect at a moment wher
.i.a. or the fbi, one or the other deleted any reference to possible terrorist activity at the time because they didn't want to trigger or let people know that's what they were looking into but again she's not the one that wrote the talking points or edited the talking points. she also said at the time look, these may not prove to be true down the road but this is what we've got so far. >> that's right. my impression of this is yours which is that she read from prepared talking points and delivered messages that had been vetted and developed by the intelligence community in what was a chaotic and rapidly developing situation. it became clear fairly quickly that the attack on the benghazi consulate was a premeditated effort by terrorists. the president used the word terrorist actions the next day. and this isn't something -- this isn't iran-contra. this wasn't concealed for six months or a year. there wasn't complete disavow of any knowledge. this was the intelligence community saying we shouldn't be out there publicly in the fi
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)